Should Bob Brunning be regarded as a member of Fleetwood Mac?

[wetcamelfood]

Originally Posted by Author

The question is: Would Peter G name his new band Fleetwood Brunning? Hardly. Green had his sights firmly set on his favorite rhythm section, Messrs. Mick F and John M when he quit John Mayall in the early summer of 1967. When McVie got (temporarily) cold feet and remained with Mayall, Green simply wanted someone who could deputize. Brunning joined in mid-July 67 at the the earliest and he was out six-to-eight weeks later in September 67. I guess Green chose an unknown player (instead of, say, Dave Ambrose or Ric Grech who both tried out) to underline the fact that this was a temporary situation. Hence there was no hurtful Pete-Best-sacking when Brunning graciously bowed out. I'd even argue and say McVie was a founding member given the fact that he, Green, and Fleetwood recording the first acknowledged F Mac tracks in late spring 67. As for the dates in the gig sheet reproduced in Brunning's "Blues: The British Connection" (p 116) these were all Savoy Brown gigs (oops, not C Shack as I hurriedly wrote above), whatever his claim to the contrary.

The Stones also wanted Ian Stewart to be a member of their band too but as we know sometimes in life things don't end up the way people want them to. So again, not for a "certainty".

Also there's bound to have been other bands formed over the years that were named after people they were never in (or at least not long out of after their formation but they carried on anyways). This calls for a ChiliD list.

I see what you're saying and fair enough I respect your point of view though.

John